Development application · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
Development application 19 152040 STE 19 CD
1624 Queen St E; 1628 Queen St E; 1630 Queen St E
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 9 May 2019
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
- Addresses
- 1624 Queen St E; 1628 Queen St E; 1630 Queen St E
- Ward
- Ward 19 · Brad Bradford
- Submitted
- 9 May 2019
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 88 units
- Related file
- 15 129628 STE 32 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Draft Plan of Condominium application for a newly-constructed mixed-use building: 88 dwelling units
Linked lobbying registrations
These links are inferred by lobbyTO from file numbers and addresses named in the registration (task L2); the registry does not record which application a registration concerns.
Links between records are inferred by a model and are not reviewed by a person. Each link shows its score out of 1; moderate-confidence links (0.7 to 0.9) are wrong more often than high-confidence links. How links are scored
Marlin Spring Developments · registration SM28349
Development of condominium with respect to 1630 Queen Street East lands.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.74
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM28349: Development of condominium with respect to 1630 Queen Street East lands. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 19 152040 STE 19 CD at 1630 Queen St E: Draft Plan of Condominium application for a newly-constructed mixed-use building: 88 dwelling units (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development of condominium with respect to 1630 Queen Street East lands.
Matched fields
- address
- 1630 QUEEN ST E
- application_address
- 1630 QUEEN ST E
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 1 communication · 1 meeting · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 19 Beaches-East York | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 5 June 2019 |
Other registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
- Marlin Spring DevelopmentsSM22136 · 18 August 2015 · “1630 Queen Street East”
Comparison with similar applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 19
1 lobbied · 1 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.03 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.